#where are female characters who value morals over their feelings!!!

[leportraitducadavre]

You know there’s a weird connection between the fandom’s perceived idea of “good writing” and their personal feelings about specific characters. “I like this character, therefore, they’re well written” and viceversa, “I dislike this character, therefore, they’re badly written” –I’ve seen this in many fandoms and with different characters, but there’s no fandom where this is more noticeable than in the “anti Sakura” portion of the audience.

Before we start, let me be clear on something: I don’t personally like Sakura, I don’t consider myself a fan of hers (or her stans, which are just as annoying as Hinata’s), nor I believe she’s the “heroine” of a story that has no room for a character with such status (I’ve said this before, Naruto is the hero and Sasuke is the antagonist -there’s no necessity nor space for anyone else as Sakura is merely the female character with most panel time, yet she doesn’t move the plot forward and she isn’t relevant to the development of other key characters, as most of them completely ignore her existence).

“Likeability” isn’t a determining factor when it comes to labelling a character “well” or “badly” written, such notion relies on subjective factors which makes it impossible to objectively determine the overall value of a character inside a story.

The most important factor to label a character “goodly written” has more to do with how well they represent their theological narrative. For instance, Danzo -who I genuinely despise, is amazingly written, as he spot on tackles the subject of extreme-nationalistic world view, while Itachi -on the other hand, is sort-of all over the place as he subscribes to Danzo’s ideology and defends it with the same actions, yet Kishimoto desperately wanted to keep him inside the “good guys” group, which ultimately failed and took down anything Itachi might have had going for him (besides other inconsistencies as he’s presented as a genius who made nothing but mistake after mistake). There’s a reason why the antagonists are often the ones with the best characterizations, as they aren’t tied to been “morally correct” or “likeable” in order to reflect their thematic plot, which is why the better characters in Naruto happen to be Uchiha (Sasuke, Obito, Madara).

Sakura has no weight inside the plot, as she is mostly used for support of either Naruto and (to a lesser extent) Sasuke, she stands narratively in the same spectrum as most “good” characters of the show, so she’s thematically not much more relevant than the rest of K-11; yet she’s given more depth than many other characters, as she’s a layered character of whom we see both her strengths and flaws, something we can’t say for other characters, such as Hinata.

In the Hyüga princess™’s case, her personality is mostly one dimensional as she is a thematic piece used to deepen Neji’s character. In case you haven’t noticed, she was constructed in opposition to him: She needs to be shy in order for Naruto to take pity on her when Neji insults her (as Neji is mostly arrogant and outspoken), she’s comically bad because Neji is a prodigy, she’s “a freak” (said by Naruto himself) because Neji isn't, she’s a slave owner because Neji is her slave, and so on –the only thing she has that wasn’t built in order to oppose her cousin was her infatuation with Naruto, something she makes a priority.

Everything we “know” about Hinata was mostly fandom-made, Hinata is shy and soft spoken, why is she considered “nice”? We never saw her worrying about anyone but Naruto: She was glad Kiba lost his match and offered Naruto the ointment to treat his wounds, she diminished her cousin’s trauma and endorsed the oppressive system of her clan, we never see her visiting Kiba after he returned from his mission to bring Sasuke back to Konoha (something we see Ino and Sakura do with their respective teammates, and while Hinata was recovering from Neji’s attack, she had enough strength to train and go see the Chünin Exams final stage, at no point is mentioned she was bed-ridden, as Sasuke had enough time to recover from Gaara’s attack before escaping the village), she thought about Naruto’s warm hand seconds after her cousin died and she was the only character not shown to be glad about Shikamaru being alive as we saw her pouting and thinking about how much she wanted to be beside Naruto. Furthermore, is there any scene in which she appears where she’s not thinking or talking about Naruto or where he is not the main focus?

How come a character designed to be nothing more than support (for Neji and Naruto, as her infatuation with him was built in order to have some oppositional force to the idea of “nobody likes him”, as Naruto has an unrequited love for Sakura during the whole duration of the manga) is “better written” than Sakura, who despite herself being also support she has far more thematically ground to move around (Kishimoto explores through her different themes, even if they aren’t relevant to the plot itself, such as romantical obsession, low self-esteem and the decisions/characteristics that are driven by it, female friendship, and few others).

Honest question: It’s her sad background reason enough to like Hinata? Do you truly need a “compelling” backstory in order to claim a character is “better written” than others? Sakura was bullied because she was shy, Hinata -being the Hyüga heir, wasn’t shown to suffer the same fate at the hands of her classmates. Think about it this way, while Sakura was being bullied and had to be helped by Ino, Hinata was being trained by her father and witnessing Hiashi torture her uncle while Neji cried, helpless! –and just a few years later, she used that exact knowledge to insult him! So she’s not really that nice after all!

What is it with the obsession of both fandoms with the idea of “potential” and how, apparently, they were “robbed of it” (what “potential”? When did Hinata even hint at improving her fighting techniques? She was defeated every single time! When did Sakura, who canonically has a smaller chakra pool than both Sasuke and Naruto, have the possibility of surpass literally Ashura and Indra’s reincarnations? Them having more panel time will mean absolutely nothing as we’ll see them doing the exact same thing we already see them do only twice as much. “Potential” is about exploring a latent ability of them, Hinata has none and Sakura’s chakra flux control was properly exploited!).

There’s more to say about this, but I’m honestly tired at this point…

#anti hinata #anti hinata hyuga #anti hinata hyuuga #anti hinata fandom #anti hinata stans #anti nh #anti naruhina #anti naruhina fandom #anti sakura #anti sakura haruno #anti sakura fandom #anti sakura stans

[strrwbrrryjam]

its funny that i write a post about respecting the female characters of rdr2 then i get recommended a post talking about getting a 'bad feeling' about mary taking advantage of arthur, the exact thing i was talking about

dude she asks you because it's a VIDEOGAME and you're the PROTAGONIST and she's an important character of the PROTAGONISTS PAST that gives him DEPTH - who else is she going to ask, uncle? she's a part of ARTHURS past

and then you're talking about her having some moral high ground when she does? i love arthur so much, but even i can't deny that between the two of them he has no moral high ground, he's an outlaw, a murderer who regularly steals from and beats and kills innocent people, while mary is a society woman

she isn't taking advantage of arthur at all, she comes to arthur for a variety of reasons, one of them being she's a widowed woman with a gambling drunk of a father, a dead mother, a dead husband and her younger brother leaving to join a cult, living in 1899 where women had limited rights and opportunities, especially in matters of finance and property ownership, her options for independence and support were severely contained and another because arthur is actually capable enough to save her brother from a dangerous cult that is planning to kill themselves, to wrangle up her drunk and likely abusive father, to rescue her mothers broach from a moving carriage.

and again, it bears repeating, that this is a videogame and her missions are OPTIONAL

of course, she's going to get mad when you tell her no because you are not only letting her dead mother's broach be sold but also signing her brother's DEATH WARRANT

she is incredibly grateful each time, thanking him profusely for saving her younger brother, she clearly still misses him, still loves him and still very much longs for a relationship with him despite their troubled past and arthur's outlaw status. her saying arthur will never change is more of a way to remind herself that their relationship would not work out, because arthur is still incredibly loyal to the gang that he prioritised over her during their relationship. even when mary asks, no, practically begs for arthur to run away with her from the law, from the gang, from everything, and arthur so clearly wants to, he still prioritised money and the gang over her, when mary doesn't need money, all she wants is arthur.

in the second mission, mary says "if i was fair to you, and a good person, i would have sold you out a long time ago," this is not only acknowledging her own flaws in this relationship, that she hasn't always treated arthur fairly, she's still incredibly loyal to him, as arthur is a wanted man, with a large bounty on his head, she could have him hanged if she truly was unfair to him, but she doesn't. the love she still has for him is still so strong. and arthur even admits to her being right about this.

despite the fact that mary still loves arthur and that the connection they share is still so strong, mary decides to choose herself and gives arthur the engagement ring she had kept in good condition for so long. she's constantly faced with the reality that arthur will never choose her over a life where death is around every corner. she learns that waiting for arthur is futile and damaging to her emotional health, so in the end, she chooses herself. she chooses to stop waiting and sends back the engagement ring (that she's kept for years, in good condition, that she could have sold because it's clear her family is struggling) and sends it back to arthur, a symbol of a relationship that will never find fulfilment. she prioritizes herself, even though it means letting go of the man she loves so dearly.

even though it's incredibly heartbreaking to her, given that she mentions when she's with arthur, the world feels right, she chooses self-respect and empowerment instead. despite the love she still holds for arthur, she decides to value herself and makes a choice that honours her own well-being. highlighting the strength and resilience she has gained throughout the story.

mary is an important character that adds to the depth and richness of the story and to arthur's character. her complexity mirrors arthurs, where she grapples with her own struggles and desires. she is not as one-dimensional as you portray her. dismissing her and portraying her in such a negative light does nothing but show how misogynistic you truly are.

also, the members of the gang don't like her for a variety of reasons, susan suffers from a bad case of internalised misogyny and believes that mary has ideas above her station, dutch sees mary as a threat to arthurs loyalty, only wanting arthur to be loyal to him, john, marybeths and tilly's perception of mary is heavily influenced by the emotional turmoil arthur suffers after interacting with her, because he still deeply loves her and yet the two of them cannot be together due to his loyalty to the gang. it's important to remember that out of all the gang members, abigail thinks fondly of her.

#its frustrating how people will give characters like micah the benefit of the doubt while he is obviously taking advantage of the gang #and sells them out to the law while mary has every reason to sell them out but doesn't because unlike micah #she's loyal and cares so deeply for arthur that she keeps him safe despite her better judgement #yet mary's the bitch #like honey your misogyny is showing and its making you look stupid and ugly #this started off as a response to someones shittake then it ended up into being a full analysis #rdr2 #red dead redemption 2 #rdr2 mary gillis #mary gillis #rdr2 arthur morgan #arthur morgan #rdr2 van der linde gang #van der linde gang #strawberry speaks

[balkanradfem]

This video on 'Bella Swan's khaki skirt' made me laugh so much I've decided to try and read the Midnight Sun, something I've been avoiding in my security that no important information is to be gained there. I almost gave up at the beginning because Edward's narration is incredibly tedious and dramatic and annoying to me. He isn't just talking to himself at all times, but actually painting a picture for the reader, explaining in detail how every single event in his life is torture and suffering and absolute hell on earth, but also how he is in every way superior to every human being around him. Even as a female fantasy of a male, this is very shallow and immature.

However, there's some new information I found very interesting; namely about Alice. While Edward is being a little drama queen and agonizing over whether he kills Bella, Alice has a vision where she and Bella are friends. Actually, Edward uses the term 'girlfriends' which had me jumping up in shock and laughter. Bella and Alice, girlfriends? And he's like 'but would she like a vampire girlfriend' YES SHE WOULD EDWARD. It's what we all want. god you're exhausting.

So anyway, instead of being annoying about it, Alice exclaims that she loves Bella, like, way sooner into the book than Edward even considers it, and then every day she's trying to get Edward's permission to talk to Bella, which he denies her, and she repeats how much she already loves Bella. She also stands up for Bella every time Edward is doubting her, so even far before she even talks to Bella, she's Bella's strongest advocate! She's the only one truly in Bella's corner this entire time.

Now I'm having much clearer idea of why Alice and Bella should have ended up together, they would have been amazing. If there is no fanfic out there of this extended story I'm tempted to write it.

I also now realize how the twilight world is painted in an almost completely black and white values for all of the characters. Nearly all of the classmates Bella has are described as extremely shallow, self-obsessed, selfish, unobservant and vulgar, with exception of Angela. Edward is also exactly like that but he considers himself superior. All female characters who are not Bella or Angela act and think identically, react identically and have thoughts that are almost completely the same (swoon over Edward). All of the males are pretty much predators, Edward included.

However, the main characters are supposed to be seen as morally superior, different, special, better than anyone else, even when they're 100% not any of that, it's just a feel-good fantasy! They're just as shallow and self-centered, and soon engage in a vast manipulation of everyone around them.

But it is entertaining to be put in such a simple world, where everyone's thoughts and motives are super obvious and you can easily distinguish yourself as 'not like everyone else' just by being normal. We're meant to see ourselves in Bella and get that feeling that we should be rewarded for our normal thoughts, normal values and goals, because hey, everyone else is so much worse. It kinda makes me laugh now, because I didn't realize it as a kid, how much of a setup the entire town of Forks is.

Anyway, I have to finish this book, because it does make you want to read on even when you're incredibly annoyed and exhausted by the narrator.

#alice x bella #midnight sun #edward cullen #bella swan #alice cullen #twilight books

[wetcatspellcaster]

7 and 8 for the Tav asks. :D and congrats on the thesis!

Thank you for the questions! Sorry for the long answer!

7. Describe their arc. How would a player help resolve it? What choices can be made? Can your Tav be turned down a dark path, or pulled to a lighter one?

So I thought about this a lot, the Good Ending for Rosalie is she's Just A Person, the Bad Ending is that she volunteers to become the mindflayer at the Orpheus decision for ENTIRELY THE WRONG REASONS (feeling like a liability, believing it's the only way to cure her mental illness, seeing herself as the weak link in the group, being depressed, etc. - this ending bought to you by me staring at that decision screen for an hour KNOWING she'd turn herself into a mindflayer in a heartbeat but feeling physically ill over her logic behind that decision). This is the 'exalted mind' ending.

So there is a bad path for her, but it's one bought about by being self-sacrificing to the point of absolute idiocy and self destruction. I think that Tav literally swerves her away from it by teaching her to be a little selfish and to value herself lmao. Literally the opposite of most of the other companions, and kind of what I wish you could teach Wyll in his storyline tbh!

Her arc would be her just generally being over-emotional and reckless, with lots of camp chats about morality in Act 1 (I would probably double down on the tropes that fandoms hate in female characters a la Katara in Avatar the Last Airbender just for the lols). I want her ending Act 1 feeling like a trite 'heart of the group', ridiculous Mary Sue, she talks to you a lot about how you're feeling, are you ok? Borderline annoying tbh, but with the EA Halsin Effect of "oh, you're the companion who's nicest to me!!". Then in Act 1/2 depending on approval she does something utterly stupid, like run into a fight alone unprompted (death to a wizard), or possibly have Ethel specific dialogue that pisses Ethel off if she's in your party, and the player starts thinking "god this girl is a bit weird and reckless and stupid at times actually", and calling her out on it gets the illithid tadpole as anxiety med drop.

Act 3, you start meeting people from her past (bonus comedy route for if you just enabled all her behaviour at this point to be nice to her and get her approval bc then the illithid tadpole drop happens here). Larroakan is like "aren't you that mousy little scribe who completed those commissions for me?", you can find Threnn, possibly did an infernal translation for Gortash (not canon just for story tie-in)???? and they're all like "who the fuck are you? why are you so different now". There would be a confrontation about lying about who she is, a camp conversation about the pressure they face as the 'heroes of Baldur's Gate" and how she feels inadequate. And then in the conversation with Threnn, and the final Orpheus conversation, Tav can encourage Rose to have an actually healthy relationship with her emotions and not see her every choice as a failing actually. Then you unlock real Rose personality and a final decision where she doesn't try and throw herself on her sword.

8. After Act 3, what does their life look like? What are they talking about at the reunion party?

Good ending Rosalie has rebuilt her relationships with her family, she's back at the Watchful Order but getting all their backlog of heroic deeds retroactively converted into a wizard qualification, and unromanced she'll mention that she's either considering going on secondment to Avernus or helping Halsin in the Shadowlands/feywild as her practical project for the final part of her grade. She will have visited every single companion in the six months (Wyll/Karlach as a projection). She will mention going to tea weekly with Gale given that she's fast-tracking wizardry/he needs a friend group and practice at being a normie and they live in the same city. She will name drop being friends with Tara very smugly.

Bad ending Rosalie is a mindflayer and will talk about the magic she's capable of and the power she's unlocking, now she's no longer letting emotion cloud her judgement. You can ask her about her parents and if she's gotten back in touch and she says, "oh, right. I used to have those."

tav ask game! :)

#asks #ask game #tav ask game #honestly Rosalie is me getting frustrated at Lawful Good being seen as the 'boring' option and doubling down... #...so I imagine she'd annoy a bunch of people A LOT :') #(it was a very specific Early Access feeling... ifykyk)

[bohemian-nights]

I can’t believe there’s excuses for what Rhaenyra says about Nettles, the only Black character in the Dance (“a common thing”, “low creature” and “you need only to look at her to know she has no drop of dragon’s blood in her”). Trying to pass it as her paranoia due to Mysaria and cheating doesn’t work. If you call a POC a racial slur, that’s racist regardless of whether that person did something to you. Rhaenyra isn’t Daenerys or Arya, she tried to murder a teenage Black girl. I am not here for any Rhaenyra’s stan trying to excuse or downplay a white woman’s misogynoir and classism because her sons died. Grief doesn’t make you suddenly racist, or compel you to say racist things. You were always that way. The grief just brought out the racism and supremacism that was always simmering beneath the surface.

Actually, Rhaenyra reminds me of the racist Southern plantation owner Mary Epps in the film 12 Years a Slave, who feels jealous and threatened by Patsey (played by Lupita Nyong’o) when her husband Ed constantly rapes Patsey and other female slaves. Mary hates and blames her and the other Black slaves for “seducing” her husband, while making excuses for his outbursts of rage, violence and lust.

And the fact that some of these people say that they like Nettles is what makes it worse.

(This also goes out to some of Team Green who any other time are capable of admitting that Miss Maegor is in the wrong, but suddenly when it’s a Black girl it’s all Missy Anne is a victim too).

If you actually liked Netty you wouldn’t downplay her hurt. You wouldn’t downplay how she was almost killed in her sleep by Missy Anne. You wouldn’t forget that she’s vulnerable. You wouldn’t forget that she is a too woman.

Any way you slice it, she being Black, homeless, a bastard, and the daughter of a whore, is the lowest person in the racial/social/class strata. You don’t like someone and ignore their identity and the role that plays in their treatment(both inside and outside the story).

Septon Eustace(the one who reported on what happened during the council meeting where Nettles death was given a death sentence) may be biased against Missy Anne, but remember who Nettles is.

Remember that even when he was defending her Corlys of all people still called her dirty and ill-favored.

Is it really so hard to believe that Missy Anne would call her a low creature without a drop of dragon’s blood?

Is the woman who ordered her head truly supposed to suddenly be a beacon of morality?

Murder is fine, but she wouldn’t stoop to racism. Eustace totally just threw in those lines for shits and giggles.

As if he needed to do such a thing when she was fine with breaking guests rights and murdering her in her sleep.

Missy Anne is in the wrong here. Not Daemon who was the one person(baring Maester Norren, shout-out to him, he seems nice) who didn’t have a thing to say against her and protected her with his life. Or Mysaria, who while is a conniving snake, she’s not the one who signed that letter.

Like it or not the moment Missy Anne ordered Nettles to be murdered she became the big bad wolf in her story.

The “mental breakdown” excuse is old. She was perfectly fine with Mysaria sleeping with her husband, but only flips out when a Black girl does it.

To not acknowledge that shows me that you value her feelings, personhood, and “suffering” over Nettles(and there are broader implications with that).

Rhaenyra is just like the women from old yonder. The only difference between she and a woman like Mrs. Epps is that she has more power yet she still chooses to punish Nettles rather than her husband. Point blank period she’s a racist.

Then again it’s not hard to see why these people don’t think Missy Anne is racist given how quick they are to say Nettles should be cut because she is Black, are comfortable with calling characters the N-word or comparing Black characters to monkeys, don’t see the problem with calling Dettles disgusting even though they ship an abusive incestuous relationship, yet somehow they aren’t racist a**holes.

Anyone taking these people remotely seriously, let alone viewing them as an authority on racial issues is out of their mind.

#bnasks #bnask #nettles #anti rhaenyra targaryen #anti rhaenyra stans #hotd fandom misogynoir

[zumurruds]

Here's part two of this ask.

(Warning: this list may contain spoilers!)

6. Rachel - I enjoy narratives where the author allows readers to make their own assumptions about characters, leaving enough mystery to keep us guessing the complete truth. From the start, Rachel from My Cousin Rachel intrigues both the protagonist and readers with her enigmatic charm and unclear motives. Rachel's actions keep readers guessing about her true intentions, blurring the line between innocence and manipulation. Her subtle yet significant influence on other characters keeps readers engaged until the end. Rachel's ability to navigate societal expectations while maintaining her independence and confidence adds layers to her character, making her truly compelling and enjoyable to read.

7. Damianos of Akielos - One of Damen's most cherished traits from Captive Prince is his emotional sensitivity and capacity for love. Unlike typical warrior archetypes, he values intimacy and emotional connection over stoicism. His relationships, particularly with Laurent, showcase his ability to open up authentically and forgive those who have hurt him, challenging the idea that strength means emotional detachment and revenge. Additionally, Damen's aversion to killing and its toll on him challenges traditional views of masculinity. Despite his combat skills, he feels the weight of killing and doesn't take pleasure in it. His reluctance to harm, especially those he loves and even those who have hurt him deeply (Jokaste, Laurent, Kastor), highlights his moral integrity and compassion. Furthermore, Damen's courage to confront injustice and challenge oppressive systems that exist in both Vere and Akielos demonstrates his commitment to change and progress, showcasing his moral conviction.

8. Nakia - Female spies are such a special interest of mine, so naturally I gravitate towards Nakia's character from Black Panther. She is a skilled Wakandan spy and is known for her intelligence, combat prowess, and unwavering dedication to protecting Wakanda and its people. One of Nakia's defining traits is her commitment to humanitarian efforts outside of Wakanda's borders. She believes that Wakanda, with its advanced technology and resources, should use its power to help those in need around the world, even if this perspective initially puts her at odds with King T'Challa, her former lover and king. 9. Roy Walker - One of the standout aspects of the film The Fall, aside from its breathtaking visuals, is the emotional evolution of Roy. Initially portrayed as a disillusioned stuntman, Roy's interactions with young Alexandria become a catalyst for his emotional and psychological healing. Through storytelling, Roy's inner turmoil is gradually unveiled, allowing viewers to empathize with his struggles. The bond between Roy and Alexandria is central to the film's narrative, offering both heartwarming and poignant moments. Despite their age and background differences, Roy finds solace in Alexandria's innocence and imagination, as they embark on a shared journey through fantastical landscapes, which symbolizes Roy's quest for emotional reconciliation. Roy's character is also imbued with mystery and ambiguity, and viewers are left questioning the authenticity of his stories and the depth of his connection to Alexandria, adding layers to his complexity and inviting various interpretations. 10. Farha - Farha's story from the Netflix film Farha is incredibly important because it serves as a reminder of the human toll of historical events like the Palestinian Nakba. Through Farha's perspective, we witness the devastating impact of the mass murder and displacement of Palestinians, particularly those of young girls like Farha who dream of education and a better future. Her desire for education and autonomy reflects the universal human longing for dignity and self-determination, rights that have been historically denied to Palestinians. By centering the narrative on Farha's personal journey, the film humanizes the larger historical events of the Nakba, allowing viewers to connect on a deeply emotional level with the experiences of ordinary individuals caught in the midst of conflict. Farha's narrative mirrors the collective experience of Palestinians: one marked by resilience, courage, and unwavering hope in the midst of unimaginable adversity. Her story highlights the ongoing brutal and inhumane Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, particularly in the context of the ongoing genocide they are currently experiencing. Through her story, we are reminded of the importance of bearing witness to the past and honoring the voices of those who are marginalized and silenced.

Thanks for this ask, @dnana-2809-blog!

#my cousin rachel #damianos of akielos #captive prince #the fall #palestine #farha

[blueteller]

"To eat your cake and still have it" – Mary Sues VS Misunderstood MCs

I started wondering about something recently. Namely, why isn't Cale Henituse a Mary Sue?

"Gasp! But Blue Teller!" – you say. "How could you possibly accuse Cale of being a Mary Sue?! No one would dare say such a thing!" Just, hear me out for a moment.

While people's opinions vary on what exactly a "Mary Sue" is, I think most of use have the basics down: it's basically the type of protagonist you see in badly written fiction (commonly fanfiction specifically) – usually female, but can be male as well (although it's rarer to see male characters openly condemned by the audience for being Over-Powered and One-Dimensional due to stereotypes). Male counterpart is sometimes called "Gary Stue", but I'll keep using MS for simplicity.

MS is perfect, doesn't have flaws – or at least any "real" flaws, for example she's allowed to be "clumsy" or have "low self-esteem" because those traits still make her attractive. She is gifted, talented, beautiful (although she's mostly unaware of it) and everything goes right for her. Everybody adores her and she is objectively The Best. Anyone who disagrees with her is the Bag Guy. Often the object of romantic interest for many, MANY people around her, because of course everybody is attracted to Mary Sue! She's allowed to have a tragic backstory, but within the story itself she rarely experiences any hardships or failures. The world itself seems to be only interested in her alone, even reality bends in order for her to be successful.

You know, that type of character.

So now you might be thinking: doesn't that sound suspiciously close to a certain favorite red-head of ours??

So we go back to the main question – how is Cale not a MS?? Because most of the typical MS traits I pointed out seem to be true for him! Even how he has very few "real" flaws, but those usually make him only more attractive!

Not all of the things I described MS with line up with Cale, obviously; he experiences failure, both past and present, and he suffers a lot. More importantly, Cale is by no means a badly-written character.

MS is a typical Good Protagonist. Her intentions are pure, or at least mostly. We take it at face value that she's In The Right, or at least we're supposed to. Cale is more morally complex than a typical Good Protagonist from the get go, but that's not what makes him different: it's the fact that he acknowledges the complexities of morality. He doesn't simply seperate people by them being "good" and "bad". Everybody has their own goals and interests, including Cale. Just because other people's opinions don't align with him 100% doesn't make them his enemies. He is also often biased, or even wrong.

We are set up to root for him, obviously, but he's not Unquestionably in the Right. However, he still receives the same amount of glory and attention that a MS gets for being the Perfect Protagonist.

But just what is it about him that makes him work, though? What makes him different? Why is a typical MS considered "shallow" and "badly written", while Cale is one of the best and most compelling characters I've seen in a while?

Well, most of the answers to those questions can be summed up in a single word: misunderstandings.

Let's face it – having a character we root for receive fame and attention can be very gratifying. But it's exactly that feeling which some (usually amateur) authors get drunk on, and eventually go too far with it, creating an Unrealistically Perfect Objects of Admiration – which in turn makes them too feel too fake to make them relatable, especially if they are too pretty and OP on the top of everything. They stop being a fun character, and become One-Dimensional like a stock image, a statue; basically a caricature of the very good protagonist they're supposed to be.

However, there is a solution to that: to make a character receive all the glory while not being a MS. And that's the Power of Misunderstandings!

Yes, the way to eat your cake and still have it in your possession… Have a character who is in fact flawed and commits errors. But due to circumstances and wacky hijinks, as well as some seriously thick Rose Glasses on, the MC's companions constantly misunderstand the situation! Now the MC still gets all the credit without sacrificing their character for the sake of fanservice!

It's the perfect solution!

It's not the only story where I've seen this trope, but TCF excels at it. The story thrives on the comedy of misuderstandings, creating fabulous scenarios. Cale gets misunderstood by countless people in countless ways throughout the novel. All of these accidentally create the image of a MS-worthy hero, except he's not like that at all! Furthermore, he hates it! He hates being percieved as something he is NOT! And it's hilarious!

That is how it is done in modern era, my friends. We no longer need to deprive ourselves of cake in order to still have it. After all… now CTRL+C exists, hahaha! 🎂🎂🎂

#tcf #trash of the count's family #lcf #lout of the count’s family #mary sues #cale henituse #analysis #character analysis #misunderstandings #the power of misuderstandings #tcf humor #writing

[leohtttbriar]

1, 8, 10, if you want to!! :)<3

<333 yeah i've been called "opinionated" too many times in my life to not want to lol

all of these got soooo long, but i answered them on my lunch break and didn't have the energy for any proper editing so like. just remember you asked. this is on YOU. and i can only hope for a similar level of expostulation in your answers!

the character everyone gets wrong

so i don't think everyone gets her wrong but a lot of people do.

eowyn is in fact precisely concerned about the role of women. she says so. i've seen this popular reading that eowyn is not feminist-girl badass--she's really there to learn a wwi-eque moral lesson about how reknown is not going to cure your depression and so on. and i think that's fairly reductive.

eowyn is aware of her vulnerability. she is losing her protectors one by one. and "reknown" is not, like, the narcissism the other reading is implying. it's an achievement allowed only for those within the male-sphere. it's an implication of power and a sense of responsibility, to answer the vulnerability. like tolkien isn't going to write a character who wants to be sung about and disparage either being sung about the desire to be sung about. the rohan characters he wrote are very inspired by anglo-saxon culture and poetry and eowyn being like "i'm going to hang up my shield now" can mean A LOT of things, including Tolkien just being sexist. what i don't think it means is a condemnation of eowyn's previous desires to begin with. she wants to hang up her shield only after she's secured her place in history. like, as someone who wants to be a keeper of a hall and protect her people, that's an ideal heroic ending for her. idk, that last bit is probably super generous to tolkien but i still think that eowyn is absolutely a character meant to express feminist values.

8. common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

okay i think it's a relatively common opinion that the reason f/f ships and even just female or female-coded characters are less popular than m/m ships and male or male-coded characters is due to big Misogyny. digressed.

but i also think that fandom is bad at understanding male characters, mostly because they are very busy applying an overly-good faith to all of them to the point of fantasy. my unpopular opinion is that this attitude is like when moms love their son or sons the best. my unpopular opinion is that the word "babygirl" applied to any male character is not in fact the transgressive epithet that everyone thinks it is. i opine that actually terms like "babygirl" and "malewife" are ways to emasculate male characters in a specific way that separates us from the very real realness of the kind of masculinity that suffocates shes and theys outside of fandom; while still celebrating how very Male they are. calling a man "babygirl" is not real condescension. it's pure affection. which isn't necessarily wrong. only that affection for men frequently joins hands with empathy, understanding, and impassioned defense. i just can't really get behind the sweetening of male characters--whether that's making them perfect angels in fics and stuff or calling them "my poor little meow meow" as if the media in which they're being portrayed isn't trying it's hardest to get you to feel like that to begin with.

i probably wouldn't care about these definitely funny turns of phrases for dudes of fandom, but there isn't an equivalent term for female characters. and that really annoys me :/

there are also like a few people who use the term "babygirl" in a genuinely transgressive way: like in media where gay-coded villains do something evil and we're not supposed to root for them in any way, for example. i've just seen too many gifs with the words "babygirl" or "malewife" edited over male characters faces who do not deserve that fondness, imo.

10. worst part of fanon

other than the blatant misogyny expressed throughout all fanons in just a variety of ways that only an academic could enumerate...

generally speaking, hate when fanon makes characters like books/music or political opinions that are obviously just an effort to project likeability. like when i said johnny lawrence in cobra kai probably voted republican at least once in his fictional life and quite a few someones were like "that man has never voted." like i get what you're trying to do there. but it's also very very boring to only read about characters who have the exact right opinion about culture and politics.

i think it comes down to the fact that fandom is very fun place to hang out but it also be very absorbing and so people sort of forget about distance. and the distance between "queer-reading" and simply saying this-is-obviously-gay is probably the distance that gets trampled over most. like, it turns into people using things like "toxic masculinity" to prove how interesting their babygirl character is, bc look how repressed, look how sad, look how he needs queer liberation. the power of a queer-reading is its interpretive possibilities, not its potential canonization. along those lines, i think people should call "toxic masculinity" just plan old misogyny. if your masculinity is toxic, ya probably hate womenfolk.

likeability is like the core value of all fanon i have seen and it is boring

#turns out what i hate most about fandom is the women-hating :/ #who've guessed

[illwynd]

Not to be overly intrusive but I very much want to hear your rant about jms lady loki arc? Your thoughts about thor stuff are fascinating generally, and it either makes me go " I hadn't even considered this aspect of things ", or " oh that's what bothered me about this but I just couldn't find the words!" I mean it goes without saying that you don't have to if you don't want to, but I haven't heard people say anything about that arc other than it was sexist, so now I'm very curious about your opinions on it.

Oh nonny you’re not overly intrusive at all! Thank you for asking this and giving me the excuse to blather about it XD and thank you for the kind words. I clearly think about this stuff way too much, and all I can hope for is that someone else finds it of some sort of interest or value.

Re the JMS lady Loki arc…

So OK I guess I should summarize the thing for the benefit of anyone who hasn’t read it. The main gist goes like this: Thor is having to call Asgardian souls back into the world after breaking the cycle of Ragnarok, and when Loki is brought back, he is “inexplicably” in a female body. Loki has in fact arranged this as part of a con, using his new appearance to better sell everyone on the idea that he’s changed and no longer villainous, but the truth is that it’s Sif’s body he’s stolen, and Sif’s spirit is trapped in the body of a dying mortal, so it’s basically attempted murder (though Loki’s plan is thwarted and Sif is saved at the last minute). In the meantime, the “lady” Loki is a sexy, buxom caricature of played-up femininity, using her wiles to manipulate the men around her, and through it all it doesn’t really seem to be motivated by any genuine gender fluidity on Loki’s part. It’s just a trick. 

So I can see where the criticism comes from: that it’s sexist, that it’s bad genderfluid representation since it’s in the form of a murderous villain, that it resembles transphobic tropes of trans women being “really” men trying to steal whatever from women. But those criticisms never seemed to me to land quite right. They seemed to be superficial and missing something important. And there are several angles you can take in looking at it more deeply where all those criticisms just fall apart.

I’m not even really going to go into the problems with decrying it as bad representation because he’s a villain. I really hope we’re past that. It’s not good when your media queers can only be villains, but having every queer character be morally upright and squeaky clean isn’t a good answer either, because real people aren’t like that. What I ask for is that the whole range be available, and that for any given character, they are first and foremost an interesting character with believable motivations for what they do. So “but he’s so evil he was trying to kill Sif! Bad representation! Bad!” is a complaint we’re just going to set aside and make dubious faces at, because for reasons I’ll get to later, I think there is an emotional truth to the portrayal, and in fiction that matters far more than any black-and-white moral claims.

So next up, we have the complaint that he doesn’t seem to be motivated by any genuine genderfluid feelings, since it’s all just a con. And my issue with that is that… it’s a very superficial take. He is motivated by gender stuff. Just not in a way that the complainers recognize. 

The absolutely crucial detail is that his target is Sif. I say again. It really matters that he targeted Sif for this con. And yes, sure, part of his reasoning is jealousy over her close relationship with Thor (thorki is canon, y’all). But another part is this: Sif is the only other (that we know of) gender nonconforming person in Asgard, and definitely the only other one that we see as being close to his social circle. But where she is celebrated as a woman who is active and successful in traditionally culturally masculine pursuits, Loki’s gender nonconformity—his failure to live up to Asgardian masculine ideals—gets him demeaned, derided, dismissed. The gender fuckery going on here is that he is furious at the difference in how their GNC-ness is treated. His resentment and anger at that injustice, and he's being a right bastard in expressing it. We stan. 

(I also do think there is something genderqueer in how the trickster considers using a feminine appearance to be just one potential tool in his arsenal, the kinda just shrugging and doing whatever works for his purposes rather than getting worked up about having to do such a thing? I mean. So shocking for a trickster figure, right? But hold that thought.)

So that was where I was with it for several years. But I kept coming back to how relatable Loki is to me as a trans masc person, and trying to figure out why it was that way, and what that had to do with this particular arc, and then it finally hit me.

This scene. 

“Thus is Loki truly beautiful.”

In this scene, Loki has just been able to finally return to his male body (with Hela’s help), and he expresses his relief and joy in it, all while the art makes him look… kinda grotesque. And my gods that is such a trans masc mood. Knowing that while you pretend to be a woman you’ll be seen as nonthreatening and acceptable, and maybe you can put up with that for practical or social reasons for a while, but it isn’t how you want to live your life, it isn’t how you want to be seen, it isn’t the appearance that makes you happy. Constantly hearing how by changing your form you’ll be changing from sexy and desirable to ugly and monstrous… but thus you are truly beautiful to your own eyes. 

(I think it is worth pointing out here, for anyone who might not know, that it is not uncommon for trans masc folks to have a phase of trying to go hard femme before they really accept themselves as trans. I personally didn’t, but I can imagine that the exaggerated femme lady Loki might be familiar to some of those guys. I, on the other hand, had a phase of treating my afab body as a tool that wasn’t really connected to me, so there are some other bits of the lady Loki arc that I find familiar. And here I should note that I’m not saying JMS had all this in mind, I have no idea whether he did or not, but death of the author, baby. The interpretation is very much there.)

And there is another little bit that I want to mention. There is one point where Fandral says to lady Loki, “even when you thought you were a man, you weren’t the man you thought you were.”

And. Firstly, screw you Fandral. Seriously. Secondly, the interpretation of this arc as being related to trans femininity gets a lot more press but that is an insult that is far more relevant to trans masc folks. The insults against Loki’s masculinity are reminiscent of how trans guys are not seen as real men, especially if they are GNC in any way, as Loki is. Loki may be amab, but his struggles are so incredibly similar to trans masc struggles (and really, I can’t be the only trans guy who fuckin loves that: a character who feels so familiar and relatable, flawed and angry and messed up in ways that I know all too well, but also has the goddamn body I wish I had. It’s the perfect combination.)

So yeah. That’s the short version, at least, of the rant about what everyone gets wrong about the lady Loki arc. The sexism, and complicated gender politics, is a thing it is commenting on, and I don't see how so many folks miss that.

#replies #anon #ty nonny! <3 #grand unified theory of loki

[licncourt]

louis as a female-coded character (or not)

I'm fully aware that this is a controversial topic and it's obviously been argued quite a lot in both directions, namely Louis as female-coded vs Louis as an example of white male privilege. I'll start by saying that, as is the case with many things, I don't see the answer as a clear "he is" or "he isn't". He has features that pull both ways, and that's really to be expected.

In general, Louis exists almost exclusively in shades of gray, in a state of almosts and not quites. That near-total ambiguity is integral to Louis as a character and I think trying to apply one universal reading to him is reductive. If he can be almost moral, almost evil, almost disciplined, almost human, why can't he be almost female-coded or almost a picture of white male privilege?

To make this less complicated, I'm going to split it into three main sections: the compelling arguments for reading Louis as female-coded, those for reading him as an all-encompassing white masculine figure, and where I think things shake out in my personal opinion.

Louis as female-coded:

PSA: I have spoken already about my dislike of characterizing Louis as a misogynistic stereotype of a woman in late canon and some fanon. I see this as an entirely separate issue, female-coding =/= misogynistic stereotypes. At least not always.

I think there will always be some validity to a reading of Louis as female-coded simply by virtue of his origin. You can never separate him entirely from the woman who inspired him, who created him as a self portrait. Anne Rice crafted Louis as a fictional reflection of herself in the midst of maternal grief and that will always exist as a baseline reading.

Another controversial topic in VC debates is the abusive nature of Loustat in IWTV, specifically if/to what extreme Lestat was an abusive partner. I'm not going to discuss that at length here, but there are some (I think) generally agreed upon harmful behaviors on Lestat's end and a lot of those end up creating situations for Louis that parallel common female experiences.

The first of these is Lestat's means of exercising control over him. Louis is (at least in his mind because of Lestat's insistence) ignorant of important information about vampires and vampiric nature. This makes him dependent if he values his own well-being. For many women, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries, minimal or a total lack of formal education restricted their ability to function independently. This also extended to an ignorance of their own bodies. Louis' forced reliance on Lestat's knowledge of life and his physical form mirrors this rather well.

Another way Lestat secures control is with Claudia. This one is very obvious, clearly a "baby trap". This act could actually code Lestat as female in some ways, but I would argue it's more analogous to a husband forcing a pregnancy on a wife to keep her from leaving. His previous method of control failing, Lestat takes advantage of Louis succumbing to his hunger in order to create Claudia.

Through a sexual lens, the feeding becomes the "intercourse" itself (I know, I'm sorry, please stay with me) and then Lestat, without Louis' consent, takes the potential that's held in the dying Claudia and creates a daughter. By turning Claudia, he's mimicked an "impregnation" that mirrors a man sabotaging birth control or forcing unprotected sex during a sexual encounter. The initial act is consensual (the feeding), but it's extended to cause an unwanted pregnancy (ie removing the condom, not pulling out).

At this point, Louis feels an emotional attachment to Claudia that's compounded by his own part in her creation, as if he created the potential for "life" that was "fertilized" (fed with blood). This is very common with mothers in cases of unplanned pregnancy, and it often pushes the woman to attempt reconciliation with her male partner for the sake of the child and to keep the family unit intact, especially if she, like Louis, feels that leaving would risk the child's safety or force her to forfeit custody (we know Lestat made implied threats against Claudia to Louis and could certainly have physically prevented him from leaving with her).

Within the power dynamic Louis and Lestat create, there are some ways (not all) in which Louis takes a more feminine position, at least in a stereotypical manner. In a mutually toxic hetero relationship, the quintessential model is often an outwardly aggressive man (in this case Lestat, the one who appears to have done most of the yelling, breaking objects/property damage, threats, displays of physical strength, etc) and a manipulative woman playing mind games (here that was Louis, leveraging his intelligence to punish Lestat by feigning apathy, undermining his self-esteem, withholding affection, etc). Obviously this is not the case for every toxic straight couple, but I would argue that these are the general assumptions.

Outside of his relationship with Lestat, Louis is also written and described by AR in strangely misogynistic ways. Again, I've talked about this before, but I'll run through some examples. The first is what is essentially slut shaming (I hate that term, but it gets my point across). At the end of TotBT, David and Lestat have a discussion that boils down to the idea that being turned into a vampire against your will (being raped) is preferable to consenting to being turned because it absolves the victim of any moral responsibility and makes them stronger.

Obviously the implication is that Louis is immoral (a "slut") for asking to be turned (consenting to and having sex). This is a disturbingly common belief in our culture. Not only is a woman having and enjoying sex immoral, but a victim of rape (or a vampire who was turned against their will) is better and stronger for it having happened (unless the woman was "asking for it", but that's another issue).

David (the truest representation of white male bullshit in the entire series, perhaps ever) comes up again as the AR-appointed perpetrator of this kind of idea, this time in Merrick. Instead of being morally weak for asking to be turned/having sex, his narration is deeply disparaging when it comes to Louis' mental health. On numerous occasions throughout the book, David speaks negatively of how emotional Louis is, trivializing and seeming disgusted/annoyed by his grief, suicidal thoughts, depression, and later, his sexual assault.

This is a terrible and deeply uncompassionate way to frame mental health in general, but what tips this dismissal of emotional pain it over into some very unfortunate female-coding is the simultaneous emphasis on Louis' beauty, sex appeal, and "softness". Really the only unequivocable positives David seems to see in Louis are how beautiful he is (this is mentioned many times and culminates in an unwanted sexual overture) and how soft/gentle he is in a very infantilizing manner. He's overly emotional, but at least he's quiet, non-confrontational, and well-behaved with nice, appropriate hobbies <3

The misogynistic female-coding goes even farther in the Prince Lestat trilogy, but that discussion/my rant about submissive tradwife Louis is linked in the PSA.

Louis as an embodiment of white male privilege

Right off the bat, it's easy to understand why people see this archetype reflected in Louis. He's white, he's wealthy, he's educated, he's a family patriarch, he owns slaves, and dictates the life of his mother and sister. He's the embodiment of what privilege looked like in the 18th century colonies. Even further, it's clear that this really is the lived experience Louis identifies with and that it's how he sees himself based on his reaction to Lestat's control over him.

Louis taking on a somewhat female-coded role in his vampire life is especially interesting since he doesn't start the story that way. By gaining vampiric power (becoming sexually involved with/marrying a man if we go back to female coding), he actually loses a portion of his autonomy, something that is obviously disturbing and foreign to him. Fortunately for him, a lot of it remains intact. His race is still visibly white, his gender visibly male, his economic status remaining unchanged or improving. He's the unchallenged breadwinner of the family and the sole manager of their business ventures and finances, something that in itself refutes the idea that he's entirely female-coded.

These static realities are a significant factor in his ability to exist as a vampire and it shields him from a great deal of potential hardship. He doesn't have to attend a day job to have a reliable income, he has access to slaves and servants to do tasks he couldn't complete on his own, and his wealth, gender, education, and race all come together to deflect suspicion and protect him should any arise (of his vampiric nature or of his sexuality/relationship with Lestat).

Furthermore, he seems largely unaware and/or unconcerned with this fact. His relationship with his privilege and how it informs his his intellectualism and moral compass is demonstrated pretty effectively in IWTV and it really permeates his narration and his character flaws. That lack of awareness is a privilege of its own. He's never in a position where he's required to examine his own complicity in the suffering of others or his part in larger frameworks of power because he's never the victim of it or of people like him.

So where does that leave us? In a pretty interesting place as far as I'm concerned. Louis comes out as a character who is at the top of the social ladder but pretty lacking in autonomy in his personal life. He's an almost maternal figure to Claudia but also the paternal backbone of the household. He's a predator and a victim, a devoted intellectual who's emotional to his own detriment. My favorite thing AR ever did in VC was refuse to mold Louis into an existing shape. He's contradictory and cherry-picked in a way that feels authentic.

Personally, I much prefer this blended masculine/feminine reading for both Louis and Lestat because it makes their relationship feel much more organic and less like a heterosexual "who's the woman/man" stereotype (which I think it very much is later on). Some gay couples have a distinctly masculine and distinctly feminine partner who take on larger gender roles, but more often that isn't the case. Both Louis and Lestat are Claudia's caregivers/parental figures and seem to invest equal effort in her upbringing. Lestat is physically stronger but Louis is the sole source of income. They're both predatory through vampirism but have noticeably effeminate traits.

The fact that both of them exist as fully fleshed out characters with a blend of masculine and feminine traits (like most real people have) and an obvious amount of gender non-conformity is part of their draw and what makes the story and dynamic of relationship work so well in the trilogy. They become far less interesting and far less complex individually and together once AR makes them "married" for real. She puts them into "man" and "woman" boxes by playing up Louis' feminine traits and Lestat's masculine traits to an absurd degree, even if it comes in direct conflict with their established personalities.

All of this is what makes that late-canon simplification and feminization so disappointing to me as a fan. The compelling nature of Louis as a character is so reliant on his dualities and committing to one reading or the other takes away from his dimensionality. It flattens him out and sticks him in a box, and one of my favorite things about him in the trilogy is that he isn't one thing that can be nailed down.

That's why I never find "Louis vampires" in pop culture (Edward from Twilight, Stefan from TVD, Angel from Buffy, etc) to be as interesting as the source material. Boiling him down to "sad vampire who doesn't like to kill humans" fundamentally misunderstands him and forgets about the conflicting traits and cognitive dissonance that makes Louis Louis.

Declaring him a masculine or feminine caricature and committing to reading him as such takes away from the experience and I hope anyone who falls firmly on one side or the other of this debate gives this perspective a chance.

#vc #meta #louis de pointe du lac #the vampire chronicles #loustat #interview with the vampire

[jeniffercheck]

interested in ALL your thoughts on the Sexualization of Shiv Roy™️ if you have any to share

So many & it's kind of conflicting at times so I really hope this all makes sense!!! I have been caught in 4k before saying that I adore how the character of Shiv Roy was handled within the writing of the show, I do really think they hit the nail on the head of how a woman like her, in that specific position, would be treated from every angle, even including and bleeding out into to how the audience is supposed to receive and perceive her (very very expectedly polarizing!!!).

So for context for all of this: one of the main things I appreciate about Shiv is how fully realized she is in comparison to her male counterparts (as in, she is just as realized as the rest of them are). Obviously a lot of people who watch the show like to pretend that she's one dimensional (and think the writers missed the mark in some aspects which I can understand those points of view even if I don't always agree, but there is always room for improvement in writing female characters 100% although Shiv is not a standard female character -- she is in many ways, acting and appealing to men), but I honestly do feel like it's safe to say (in that there is evidence to back it up) that we see so much of Shiv's personal character that is wholeheartedly NOT defined by the men on the show (her career ambitions, her sexuality(!!!), her complex thoughts about motherhood, her liberal values, the morally corrupt things she does despite those values, how mean and selfish she is, how she obviously just wants so badly to be loved, etc.) BUT (huge but), at the same time, Shiv's role on the show and her story arcs are so heavily centered around the male characters that most of her character motives & drive ARE defined by the men. Every single thing she does in that show is to win over the support of a giant group of men (starting in s2, but i will get into this)!!

[This is not always in a bad way to me, I think characters like Shiv, Gerri, & Karolina are purposefully portrayed how many women feel in real life, which is that they always have to try harder than their male counterparts to get a fraction of the credit, and there's always a risk of being undermined or overlooked (Roman betraying Gerri --more to that obviously as well-- & Hugo aiming to get Karolina fired -- more to that as well but u get the picture). We see this with Shiv most often; as hard as she tries, Roman and especially Kendall will always land higher on the rung than her (final lesson is her sitting in that car with tom).]

This is where the sexualization of Shiv Roy gets a little contradictory for me, because at certain points in the show I do have difficulty placing her motives and other times I do think it’s a really important part of her character! For added context, Roman’s sexualization is very important to me here because I think it's good to remember that from the very start of the show Shiv wasn't the ONLY character being sexualized; obviously a lot of Roman's motives are centered around his difficulties having traditional sex, and we even get some early suggestive sex from Kendall and Rava although I think that scene is pretty gratuitous (the staircase scene????? I mean I guess we know why rava fell for him<33 and the hospital boner<3) BUT I think for me, Season 1 is the only time where I think Shiv's sexuality is MAINLY (not only, but mainly) gratuitous. I think ShivNate on its own was a very good set up and introduction to Shiv's promiscuity and her inclination towards cheating/non-monogamy, but a lot of her motives and plot in that season went specifically towards all of the cheating, and by extension, sex, with Nate and the growing festering smothering feeling of being with Tom, and it is a time in the show where I felt like she seemed more like a sex object than a true competitor in the 'succession.'

Season 2, I take a lot differently. I think once she's inserted into the game completely, the playing field kind of evens out in a sense. They also stop with the suggestive scenes for the most part, and while I do believe that is in part due to the tonal shift, I think it's also uniquely fitting for Shiv's character coming into a new season. A season where she arrives with a new husband, a second season big chop (VERY professional haircut compared to s1), an updated wardrobe, and receives a brand new role in the family structure, I do play with the idea that they obviously could have kept in a lot of the same suggestive scenes that had in Season 1, yet chose not to, which in part I think has to do with Shiv becoming a 'serious person.'

One of the most interesting parts about this aspect, is that the sexualization of Shiv Roy from OTHER CHARACTERS does not end!!! The filmmakers themselves lay off on the blatant stuff (save for s2 ass shot you'll always be famous) -- Season 2 is Shiv's big season and they really start to tell her nuances and her wants and we learn so much more about her than we had in s1, yet the characters within the show, the people she's surrounded by, still don't treat her any differently!! She's a slut, she's a cheater, she's cucking Tom, she's giving a speech so let's blast 'rape me', we're caught in a sex scandal so let's use her!!! Shiv Roy is still an object!! She is a woman she is an object!!

That, is what I find most brilliant about the writing. All of Season 1 was spent showing Shiv as all of the things men fear in a woman; abrasiveness, confident, sexy, smart, willing to cheat, and many many viewers bought into this. These viewers took s1 Shiv and placed her into a box and that's all she ever was from s1 to the very last second of s4, which is exactlyyyyy how the characters in the show treated her. Her tonal shift in s2 did not matter to them, she was never fit for anything she tried for. Never. They could not fit Shiv inside their heads, which like....,,,,,,,,,,,,,,she says it to you !! She says it to everyone, the characters, to the viewers,,,,,,,,,,,,,like........amazing and why I am so enamored with her and with the writing. She is so real and so many women feel this way. She knows she's sexy too, and couldn't even use with someone like her husband who just saw her as a vending machine for an heir (gee Tom why do you think she strayed....was it the period tracking???). now i'm just going to rant so i'll stop<3333

#SORRY THIS IS SO LONG #there are so many things i wanted to include but i dont know how to fit them in #shiv is so interesting #i love the way she was written so much #i hope this one makes sense as well #jesus christ #answered #shiv roy

[mihai-florescu]

Do you mind if I ask your top 10 favorite characters (can be male or female) from all of the media that you loved (can be anime/manga, books, movies or tv series)? And why do you love them? Sorry if you've answered this question before.....Thanks...

Hello and welcome to watchmojo where today we will be ranking my favorite fictional characters.

Before we start, honorable mentions to Nobimaru, Reigen Arataka, Noah Czerney, half the cast of enstars, and so on and so forth.

10. Hamlet

Most of the list is going to have anime characters but I can't imagine a top 10 list without my original literary blorbo. We studied Hamlet in my first year of highschool, my teacher asked in front of the whole class whether we know which one of us suffers of Hamlet's tragic flaw, then pointed to me and proceeded to dismiss us for the day. How is one supposed to move on from that? I only hope I have managed to change whatever fate she implied I'd meet. But, besides that, I actually did really enjoy the play and the character even before this incident.

9. Kaoru Sakurayashiki from Sk8 the Infinity

I've said it before, but how painful is it to have one of your favorite characters be from a seasonal 12 episode sports anime... he's not even the protagonist. I just like seeing characters who appear analytical and driven by logic with low emotional intelligence make very emotional decisions. Using the logical persona more like a shield, especially if their feelings have been hurt in the past. And, well, That's Cherry. The Joe-Cherry-Adam plotline will always be so dear to me. Kaoru who kept the grudge born out of a lack of proper closure for years. Kaoru who wanted to believe things could maybe go back to how they were. Kaoru who was snapped to reality so, so violently. He's just so dear to me.

8.Victor Vale from Vicious

It's not that before I read Vicious I didn't know what morally gray protagonists were, but this is the book that really made me realise just how much I actually enjoy reading about such characters. I like how Victor (and Eli, but I've always been a Victor girl) walk the line between hero and villain, how Victor, seen as the villain, may kill but only with a reason, whereas Eli, the hero, is killing out of the conviction that EOs shouldn't exist when he himself is one. We are foils of each other, we are separated by different ideological beliefs, youre the only one who can kill me, im the only one who knows you, and so on and so forth.

But beyond his rivalry with Eli, Victor's found family of criminals, necromancer and resurected dog is so dear to me. He even dies and comes back wrong countless times. How is he not a popular tumblr blorbo already...

7. Takahashi Yotasuke from Blue Period

Blue Period has a lot of compelling characters but Yotasuke's story in particular is the dearest to me, followed by Hashida and Maki. As for what I like about Yotasuke... The way our first introduction to him is as the tehnically skilled prodigy, but soon enough learn that he doesn't have much going on in life besides that. The way his mom's assumptions of his life ended up controlling it. The way Yotasuke never really had any choice besides art. And the irony in the fact that art was all he ever had and, in the end, it wasn't why he got admitted into university, but because of his high academic exam scores. And the way he finally starts becoming his own person in university, makes actual bonds, starts choosing things for himself. I wish we had even more chapters about him but I also understand the value in seeing perspectives on life and art from a wide variety of characters in the cast.

6. Daiba Nana from Revue Starlight

The stage girl that got me into Revue Starlight herself babyy. Her fear of the future and refusal to move on, her wanting to repeat the same pleasant but unchallenging year over and over and over again. The same stage repeated with no divergences cannot continue to be captivating, yet the familiarity of the scene is preferable to losing it completely, to it becoming just a memory. What Nana had to learn was that Starlight is the only play the 99th class will do, but there is value in seeing it shift and change throughout their years together as they also grow and mature.

I initially found it funny that she was on the villains wiki since that's why i decided to start the anime to begin with, but after i watched the show and films, I can't help but think that people who honestly believe she's a villain kind of miss the point. She takes on the role of antagonist opposing the natural flow of time, sure, but she's not a villain.

5. Aoba Tsumugi from Ensemble Stars

Sometimes I'll call both Nana and Tsumugi my Jokers, so you know he had to make the list as well. As for why I like him... I'm intrigued by his utilitarian outlook on life, his ability to make himeslf believe in things, even if they're not real, to serve his purpose, and of course, his clumsy girl charm. I like seeing him make up for the pain he has took part in causing during the war. And I like hearing about his home life, it makes me insaaane whenever mrs Aoba or his brother get brought up... Overall, while he himself might not think so, he is indispensable to the story, to the war, but more importantly to what follows the war.

4. Sunohara Momose & 3. Orikasa Yukito from Idolish7

Well, here's the thing, Momo and Yuki's stories are so entwined that you can't talk about one without the other, so I will write my thoughts about both of them here. Momo is the sports anime protagonist whose career was stopped before it could even start as a result of an injury during a game, who then turned to his sister's favorite idols Re:Vale for comfort, at her recommendation. He was there at their important concerts as a follower and defender, and he was there to witness when Ban had the light fall on him. Without Momo's daily pleas, without him joining Re:Vale, Yuki wouldn't have continued being an idol. But while Yuki starts to feel better, to love both Momo and their work, Momo is haunted by the promise he made in those desperate attempts to pick Yuki up: they will not have to be partners for longer than Yuki and Ban were. Even after they find Ban and Yuki makes Momo realise he would never want another partner at this point, they're both so stubborn and ready to sacrifice themselves for the other that they're still not fully on the same page. I like the other arcs in Idolish7 but Re:Vale are what elevate it to my favorite anime of all time. There was a period in my life when I would read the Re:member manga almost daily just because I love Yuki and Momo so much.

2. Hibiki Wataru & 1. Tenshouin Eichi from Ensemble Stars

I will lump these 2 together as well, not because I don't think they're complete characters on their own, but because they defined what the story of Ensemble Stars is. To me, at least, they're the most important pillars, the foundation even, if you will. At the end of the day, enstars is a story about humanity with its multitude of complex facets, and love (learning to love and be loved). Wataru and Eichi just portray the themes of the story in the most interesting ways. Eichi playing the protagonist in his and Keito's revolution turned war story, Wataru and the other eccentrics playing the villains. That story ends with the protagonist emerging victorious, as all stories do. But it was such a rushed, not well written story that it is not satisfying for anyone involved. So, with Natsume's dream pipe of a plan, Wataru asks Eichi to write a sequel with a happy ending. That's the base for everything past the Yumenosaki war. Wataru stays by Eichi's side to see the plan through, and in the process they happen to actually grow to appreciate deeply and even love each other. Even after the original story finishes, they continue to walk together into the new era. I will Eichi here: I wonder if that's what society calls love... I just adore seeing their story unfold, and I'm nervous for what the future holds for them...

#thanks for asking i didnt want to make it too long tho #ask #elaine2895

[dogspeaker]

Do you mind if I ask your top 10 favorite characters (can be male or female) from all of the media that you loved (can be anime/manga, books, movies or tv series)? And why do you love them? Sorry if you've answered this question before.....Thanks..

This ask could not have come at a more perfect time, I am so deep in fictional character brainrot and this gives me such a great outlet for it :,) hope you're ready lmao

In no particular order:

Klaupacius and Trurl — The Cyberiad, Stanislaw Lem

These two are the main characters in this set of short stories. They are the greatest constructors in the universe — they can make anything and everything, to a fault. They're always at odds, but they are fundamentally inseparable; there isn't ever even a question in-universe of whether they'll come back together, because they always do. They have seen each other's greatest triumphs, and they have fixed each other's most egregious mistakes.

I have to put these two together; it just doesn't feel right to separate them into two entries. Even though there are some stories in the anthology where only one of them is acting, the other always makes a cameo by the end. I joke a lot about media altering my brain chemistry when I get obsessed with it, but this book truly did do something powerful to me. They exemplify the quintessential asexual queerplatonic relationship in my mind, and they have become everything I wanted for my own future long term relationship.

This book contains the most beautiful love poem I have ever read.

2. Selina Meyer — Veep

I'm obsessed with this show, and I quite literally rewatch it on a loop, only sometimes buffered by watching something else. I have a giant spreadsheet with every episode and every character listed where I am working on outlining exactly what I think every character's "rule" is, and where in the show they finally break that rule. Everyone breaks their rule — except for Selina Meyer.

Without spoilers: Selina Meyer is a masterclass in writing an in-universe anti-villain. Her (public) goals are, at face value, incredibly noble: she wants to dedicate her life to serving the public in political office. However, due to her deep personality flaws, she ends up being one of the most morally reprehensible characters ever written.

3. Howl Pendragon/Jenkins (movie) — Howl's Moving Castle

What can I say? He's gender. He has the life I want. I watch this movie to live vicariously through him. His growth is beautiful; it inspires me when I feel like I'm running from my responsibilities and loved ones.

I do also have a lot of love for book Howl, though he didn't make the cut for this list. He is a picture perfect blorbo. I'm glad they changed him deeply and fundamentally in the interest of making the movie that I know and love, so that I could be deeply and brutally shocked by how low book Howl will stoop to continue to be worse.

4. Kikyo — Inuyasha, Rumiko Takahashi

She was my first character love. Kikyo is uniquely tragic, and I haven't found another character who makes me feel the same way she does.

She's undead, doomed to wander a place where she doesn't belong until she is finally put down again. However, instead of laying down again willingly after being resurrected, she chooses to continue walking amongst the living, and by doing so endures unimaginable emotional and spiritual suffering, and she chooses this for two reasons. One, because she is still dedicated to defeating the evil that stole her life from her. Two, because she is still hopelessly in love with Inuyasha, and takes every available opportunity to have him again.

Kikyo is sympathetic, but deeply flawed. Despite knowing she is doomed never to live, she can't help but grasp at anything close to the life she desired for herself and Inuyasha, as equals and lovers. And despite knowing her turn at life is over, that she is no longer a factor in the ultimate fate of their world, she still believes that she is the only one with the power to defeat the evil that they are facing.

She dies after a life/undeath full of suffering, without reaping any of the rewards she wanted for herself — the only thing she gets in the end is a peaceful death in her lover's arms.

5. Nux — Mad Max: Fury Road

I'm such a sucker for someone who was raised in a cult, who comes out of it and comes to love the beauty they found in the world outside of their lifelong beliefs. I have so much I could say, but Nux is just so much better experienced than explained in my mind. I wish he could have lived forever.

6. Todd Chavez — Bojack Horseman

Every time I try to write paragraphs about him, it just doesn't come out right. He's the unsung hero of the show. He's a beautifully portrayed asexual character who finds fulfillment after setting hard boundaries. He has compassion for Bojack to a fault, but in the end is still able to set and keep meaningful boundaries. I just love him so much.

7. Jobu Tupaki — Everything, Everywhere, All At Once

I could write so many paragraphs. When I watched this movie for the first time, a hole in my heart was filled. There is not a single other piece of media I can think of that treats a godlike character like EEAAO treats Jobu. Being all-knowing and essentially omnipresent has rendered all material goals pointless, and relationships with people who aren't like her have no benefit in the end.

The movie has a great ending, showing that she and her mother must choose things that matter to them, to give them purpose. To me, though, there's still this big question mark in the background — it's entirely possible that they will end together in the same place that Jobu was in when the movie started, simply because that might be the ultimate final state of omniscient beings.

8. Frankenstein's Demon — Frankenstein, Mary Shelley

I didn't say "monster," because Shelley refers to him almost exclusively as a "demon/daemon" after Frankenstein learns how educated he is. He is first a monster, bumbling around committing murders and doing things without knowing the suffering he's enduring. But after he reads the books and encounters the family in the cottage, he's able to act with intention, and put words to his suffering, and all of a sudden in Shelley's words, he becomes a demon.

Essays have been written about what makes the Demon such a great character. I love him because in the end, seeing his creator's dead body, he tries to tell Frankenstein that he forgives him for his hubris. He is the first true android character in my heart of hearts.

9. Kusuriuri / The Medicine Seller — Mononoke

God, this show is a masterpiece. Kusuriuri represents a type of character that's pretty rare: he has no agenda, and in the end I don't think he even necessarily has fundamental beliefs. His mission is to resolve the turmoil of the dead which create the monsters he fights, on their terms, using "lessons" they can understand. He is entirely neutral but for that one goal. It's awesome to watch, and I absolutely CANNOT wait for the movie!!!

10. Dave Strider —  Homestuck

Listen. I hid it at the bottom of the post like a respectable, shameful Homestuck of old. He’s the best. He’s the worst. He’s transcoded. I love him. What do you want from me. I’ve clearly got some complex feelings about transmasculinity seeing as Howl is also on this list. Leave me alone. But also, I have paragraphs ready to defend this man against all wrongdoing; the only issue is that he has so many timelines, and I don’t want to subject any of the readers of this post to such things.

In all seriousness, his character helped me reckon with some very major changes in my life. For those who need it: sometimes it’s okay for your authority figures to become peers. It’s part of becoming an adult. There are just some things that are not properly articulated in short form fiction; the change from “parent/authority” to “peer/parent” is one of those things. Idk what else to say here.

#klaupacius #trurl #the cyberiad #stanislaw lem #veep #selina meyer #kikyo #inuyasha #howl pendragon #howl jenkins #howls moving castle #nux #mad max fury road #todd chavex #bojack horseman #jobu tupaki #everything everywhere all at once #frankenstein #dr frankenstein #frankensteins monster #frankensteins demon #frankesteins daemon #kusuriuri #mononoke 2007 #medicine seller #dave strider #homestuck #dogspeaker

[chronologicalimplosion]

Just saw a post pushing back against the cringification of fandom, where popular formats or kinds of writing or whatever are complained about or looked down upon for being either too popular, too lowbrow, or too earnest.

I mostly agree with it, but I’m baffled at the way they lumped the “jumps to ship whatever two skinny cis white guys are closest to hand together over all other options” criticism in with stuff like making fun of A/B/O or self-insert fic or popular meme formats. Pointing out the ways that real world biases show up in a certain community is not the same thing as calling somebody’s kink cringe.

Fandom is not some space separate from real life where you cannot do a racism or sexism or where it suddenly doesn’t matter. The readers are still real people. It will still have real impacts on the community, both in terms of what biases are reinforced and who feels comfortable being in fandom spaces.

I saw a post today talking about how fic about cis skinny white men can feel safer to read, because you don’t have to be on guard against sexist or racist or fatphobic depictions etc etc etc. I can relate to this experience, and I’ve definitely also, as a white writer, had to spend more time writing characters of color to make sure that I’m not Doing A Racism. (I recently reread some of my old pre-ao3 fic, though, and I managed to find ways to be weird about skin color even in fic that only featured white characters. Plus we’ve all read m/m fic that was shitty to the female characters on the periphery.) I still think we have to try. We have to want better for our fandom spaces.

When someone tells you that your writing style sucks, there is no moral value in being a “good” or a “bad” writer and I 100% support everyone’s ability to say “this is a hobby and I’m not doing it to improve”, if that’s what you want.

When someone complains about the clearly-labeled violence or kink or dark content in your clearly-labeled work of fiction, I’m rolling my eyes and tapping the dead dove sign along with you.

When someone tells you that your racial biases are creeping into your writing (or reading habits!), that’s not some writing quirk that only exists in the fandom vacuum, and what you’re actually saying when you say “this is my hobby” in that context is that you’re fine with the racial biases you have and you’re not going to work on them. Which I am going to judge you for.

[aquietwritingcorner]

Royai Week 2022 Day 2: Betrayal       Word Count: 654   Author: aquietwritingcorner/realitybreakgirl Rating: T   Characters: Riza Hawkeye, Roy Mustang, Rebecca Catalina     Warning: NA     Summary: Cadet Hawkeye hears of what is happening in Ishval. She wonders if Roy Mustang feels the same as she does.   Notes:     AO3 || ff.net

____________________________________

Betrayal

Riza looked at the report that had been handed around the cadets with a carefully neutral expression. The rest of the cadets were chattering animatedly about it, excited about Order 3066 and the work that the state alchemists were doing. Someone was managing to regularly snag reports about the front, and the talk for the past month or so had been about how much better and quicker the war was advancing now that the state alchemists were in the fight.

It had been the talk of the dormitories. In the shared common area between the male and female dormitories, someone had set up a board that listed each state alchemist, and the estimated kills made. Not far below it was a betting pool on who would make the most kills, who would advance the most, what rank who would have at the end of the war, and various other things. Technically, this wasn’t allowed, but their drill sergeants and instructors turned a blind eye to it, as it did improve morale, and as long as no problems arose from it.

It made Riza sick to her stomach.

“Whoa, girl, careful, you’re gonna crush that report, and others still want a look at it.”

Rebecca Catalina’s voice broke through her thoughts, and Riza looked down to realize that she was slowly crumpling up the report in her hand. She loosened her grip and handed it off to the other cadet.

“Sorry,” she apologized.

“It’s alright,” Rebecca said, although she looked at Riza a bit strangely. “You okay there, Riza?”

No. She wasn’t. There was a deep feeling stirring, burning deep inside of her. It had been growing, but it hadn’t felt this strong until now. It was welling up, twisting inside of her, and she didn’t know what to do with it. So, she did like she always did with strong emotions. She buried them deep inside of her, pulling up a mask to keep whatever she was feeling to herself.

Her eyes drifted over to the board where a cadet was updating the number of kills. She watched as he added one more place value to the number next to a name she was achingly familiar with. The cadets whooped and hollered as Roy Mustang was catapulted to the top of the rankings, and money exchanged hands.

“Yeah,” she said. “Just tired.” She looked back at Rebecca. “I think I’m going to call it a night. I’ll leave the door unlocked for you.”

Rebecca looked at her a little uncertainly. “If you’re sure…” she said.

Riza gave her a small smile she didn’t feel. “I am. I’m fine. See you later, Rebecca.”

Riza turned to leave the smile dropping from her face as soon as she was positive no one was looking at her. The feeling inside of her grew as she walked to the room that she and Rebecca shared, twisting and working at her heart and her gut. It was only after she had showered and laid down that she was able to properly identify it.

Betrayal.

Idly, she wondered if Roy Mustang could feel it. She wondered if he could feel the betrayal that he was committing against her. She wondered if he knew that he was betraying her trust, or if he, like so many other alchemists, didn’t care, as long as he had the alchemy he treasured so much.

She feared it was the latter.

Months later, on the battlefield, after making her choice not to stop the source of her betrayal when she had the chance, Riza Hawkeye looked Roy Mustang in the face, prepared to see scorn, arrogance, disregard. She was not prepared to look him in the face and see the same thing she felt.

Betrayal.

And as she walked with him and his friend Hughes back to came, Riza reflected: perhaps they were both traitors that had betrayed the dreams that they had once held dear.

#royai week #royaiweek22 #Royai #riza hawkeye #Roy Mustang #Rebecca Catalina #fma #Fullmetal Alchemist #fma fanfic #fullmetal alchemist fan fiction

[fearsmagazine]

FANGS OUT - Review

DISTRIBUTOR: Stadium Media

SYNOPSIS:  A Group of college students head to Mexico for some cheap plastic surgery. There they meet Dr. Pavor, a creepy surgeon who is actually a vampire, harvesting victims for his blood cartel. Aided by his blood thirsty nurses he systematically carries out his evil plan. When a detective looking for his missing daughter arrives - all hell breaks loose in a bloody combustible conclusion.

REVIEW: Filmmaker Dennis Devine to date has over 30 credits to his name, beginning with the first feature he directed in 1989, “Fatal Images.” That film was a genre film about a haunted camera possessed by a serial killer, and over the years he’s made numerous genre films, quite a few in the vampire genre. In FANGS OUT the head vampire uses the cover of a Mexican plastic surgery clinic to lure victims in.

The plot is a fun idea that begins to fall apart with burdensome cliches, bad one liners and tons of sexual innuendos and references that could have benefited from a polish by a female screenwriter. It amounts to soft-porn without the visuals. Three of the friends are there for the surgery and one is there for moral support. Almost every scene contains a moment where she questions the shadiness of the clinic. She also is a lesbian catholic school reject that the head vampire has an affinity for. Talk about back loading a character to fill plot holes! Once you get past the initial setup the story delivers everything you expect it to with no real surprises. The story attempts satire, possibly humor, but it tries too hard to get those laughs and the jokes fall like a lead balloon. There is a scene with nurse Anna and a random character that feels like a gag they shoehorned into the plot that could have been cut without any impact on the story.

The production values are uneven. There are times the cinematography is too hot. There are numerous annoying rough edits. There are scenes in the same location where there is an air unit running and as they cut between characters the background sound appears and disappears. The costumes look like bagged outfits from a ninety-nine cents store. The makeup on nurse Anna is bad, as are all the prosthetic fangs that look like bad dentures. The production design utilizes lots of fabric or sheets to turn rooms into operating rooms, in addition to protect the vampires from sunlight.

The performances are monotone. I’ve seen better performances in a porn films and I’m not talking about the sex scenes. It feels like they are all in on the joke and are nodding to each other thinking the audience won’t notice. There are a few times when actress Stacy Aung’s work rises above the rest for a moment, but it quickly degrades back to the same level as the rest of the cast. With the fangs in, it becomes difficult to understand what they are saying and it looks like they might spit them out any second.

FANGS OUT takes a timely topic and never hits its mark as it is stiffelled by lackluster production values, poor acting, and some sloppy writing. I’m a bit surprised because being familiar with some of director Dennis Devine’s other films, FANGS OUT feels rushed. Many of his films have that B movie feel, but there are good B movies and bad ones. Much like the character of Madison, I’m here to warn you that this is a bit shady.

Intentional or not, I did find it funny that many of the names in the cast sound like the names of porn stars and Veronica Ricci has done her share of them.

CAST: Stacy Aung, Samuel Code, Heidi Hemlock, Angel Juarez, Marlene McCohen, Jessie Vane, Brian Easter Jr, Desiree Estrada, Robert Rhine, Randy Oppenheimer and Veronica Ricci. CREW: Director/Cinematographer/Editor - Dennis Devine; Screenplay - Drake Cola & Dennis Devine; Producers - David S. Sterling & Randy Oppenheimer; Production Designer/Special Effects - Richard Calderon; Digital Effects - Jeff Leroy OFFICIAL: fangs-out.com FACEBOOK: N.A. TWITTER:  N.A. TRAILER: https://youtu.be/6MmtSXKjeT4 RELEASE DATE: On digital May 23rd, 2023

**Until we can all head back into the theaters our “COVID Reel Value” will be similar to how you rate a film on digital platforms - 👍 (Like), 👌 (It’s just okay),  or 👎 (Dislike)

Reviewed by Joseph B Mauceri

#film review #movie review #fangs out #stadium media #dennis devine #veronica ricci #Stacy Aung #desiree estrada #horror #vampires #latinx #joseph mauceri #joseph b mauceri